Re: AW: Re: Bow

[Jonathan Davies]

In Henry VIII's reign bows appear to have been stored in elm chests.  One of
his decapitated Queen's was buried in one (skinflint).  They (chests not
dead queens) have also been found in the Mary Rose.  To store bows safely
from damage rather than packing them loose would suggest either they
recognised the danger or that loose bows area menace (which they are).  If
you are interested I will email you a copy of my article on Henry VIII's
inventory which appeared in the Journal of the Society of Army Historical
Research ages ago.  It deals with all the archers ancillary equipment.   In
those circumstances.  It doesn't included bowbags for military bows but it
also doesn't include bracers, tabs or gloves.
 There is also only one (possible) archer's tab in existence found in
Coventry and identified as such by Hugh Soar.  I wonder if bow bags and
other tabs were not identified by archaeologists and historians who didn't
automatically identify them as being archery equipment.  At a lecture at the
Birmingham Department of Archaeology on the Towton skeletons it was
postulated that a small copper ring on one of the corpses could have been an
archer's thumb ring!   I remember seeing some turned horn items at a museum
(Snibston I think) which were unidentified which to me looked exactly like
horn nocks for bows prior to finishing.  You tend to see/interpret what you
naturally identify and are looking for.
Cheers
Jonathan

On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 10:27 AM, Jens Börner wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> One question bothers me: why carying arround a bow when not strung =
> anyway?=20
> When on march, the bows could be placed on a wagon, in barrels, like =
> weapons
> according to froissart for instance in the 100years war generally. When =
> near
> to the battle, they will be taken out and strung. So is there really a
> reason for a "bowbag" apart from modern ones? Might this be the reason =
> why
> we only bows strung in pictures? Compared to the crossbow, strings are
> mentioned to be worn underneath the clothing, and for instance the =
> housebook
> from wolfegg shows us crossbowmen on the march carrying their crossbows
> without any kind of protection.=20
>
> I personally think before thinking of something like a "bowbag" it would =
> be
> an idea to examine the situation of bowmen during war, camp and march
> situations to find out if such was really necessary.
>
> with kind regards,
> Jens B=F6rner
> Diu Minnez=EEt
> Reconstrution of german and french daily and military live, clothing and
> household equipment in the high and late middle ages
> http://www.diu-minnezit.de
>
>
> -----Urspr=FCngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: living-history-bounce-at-companie-of-st-george.ch
> [mailto:living-history-bounce-at-companie-of-st-george.ch] Im Auftrag von
> Jonathan Davies
> Gesendet: Dienstag, 30. M=E4rz 2010 11:12
> An: living-history-at-companie-of-st-george.ch
> Betreff: Re: Bow
>
> Bow bags protect against surface damage which could jeopardise a bow, =
> ash,
> elm and yew bows do not like being thrown around.  I have owned all =
> three
> and shoot a war bow and treating them like an old chair leg would =
> horrify
> me! Bow bags also help protect them from direct sunlight.  You shouldn't
> leave a bow out in the sun on a hot day without being aware of the =
> potential
> consequences.  A bows performance is compromised by both heat and cold =
> as I
> know only too well having broken a 70lb bow on a cold day through
> carelessness.  Bows need protection from the elements and it is natural =
> for
> any archer to protect his 'valuable' equipment.  Whether the strings =
> need
> protection from rain is another question, we still wait on the Mary Rose
> excavations for some definitive information on the subject.  How they
> protected the surface of the bow is another question entirely.
> Cheers
> Jonathan
>
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 9:17 AM, Christian Folini <
> christian.folini-at-time-machine.ch> wrote:
>
> > On Tue, March 30, 2010 10:00 am, Jonathan Davies wrote:
> > > Purely on a practical level you
> > > would be extremely foolish to risk damaging your bow by leaving it=20
> > > uncovered when not in use.  If I do that should I assume that my=20
> > > illustrious brethren cared for ther bows less?  If they did not=20
> > > protect their bows then why not?
> >
> > There have to be sources somewhere.
> >
> > With the hundreds of thousands of bows being in use during the 14th=20
> > and 15th century, I do not believe in the total absence of any =
> evidence.
> >
> > Either there has to be an explanation in the sources on why they do=20
> > not need such protection. Or there has to be a hint on the form of=20
> > protection that was being used.
> >
> > Hardly any bows survived, so I would not count on the survival of the=20
> > protection (bags?). Even more so if they were made from linnen.
> >
> > On a painting or illumination that protection could look silly and=20
> > uncomprohensible to an outsider. So I would not count on a period=20
> > illustration either.
> >
> > So if there is anything, then it is more likely to be in the text =
> sources.
> > But of course, those are the ones, that are more difficult to access.
> >
> >
> > I never quite understood the kind of protection a linnen bag could=20
>  > offer to a war bow. A linnen bag protects against minor scratchings on
> =
>
> > the surface. Anything else will destroy the bow either with or without =
>
> > the linnen bag.
> > Also, water should not be an issue. Greasing the wood regularly is far =
>
> > more effective.
> >
> > Best,
> >
> > Christian
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>